In most instances an attorney will propound discovery requests such as Requests for Admissions and Interrogatories that must be answered under oath. By carefully crafting such requests and using deposition testimony you can generally get the parameters defined to a point that there isn't that sort of "weasel room" in court. In the case of the Triton campaign the whole house of cards will obviously collapse because so much can be easily proven to be untrue once the process of discovery begins....
These back of the envelope calculations are easily enough to definitively prove that Triton's claims are total bunk in the real world, but I'm not sure how they would stand in front of a good lawyer? In a courtroom, would all a lawyer need to do is to demonstrate that any of those numbers can be 'disputed' (even if it doesn't change the outcome) to have discredited the analysis?
Yes, a good suggestion. Well, moving it above would require completely rewriting all the text, so I modified it a bit, and finally added a brief calculation for both the minimum and the moderate maximum. I hope it is now less confusing:OK, you are right - maybe could move the power requirements calculation to the paragraph above, cos otherwise people will just focus on '1/4 horsepower' which is way less than the total actual power requirement would be?
You would need a ¼ horsepower (200W) pump just for supplying the metabolized oxygen, and without accounting for the power needed for passing the water through the nano-filter. For that 3 Wh are needed at reverse osmosis for every liter. It means 8.1 kWh in the very minimal case (45*60 L/min) and up to 300 kWh under moderate extent at the depth of 5m (45*2250 L/min). All that from a tiny lithium battery with usual capacity of just units of watthours (5 orders of magnitude less).
Not only that. It could be used as a low cost desalination device - one $300 Triton could supply 54,000 liters of drinking water in 24 hours (after reminelizing the destilated water a bit) - enough for a small town. If it can align O₂ molecules to pass through holes justWhat gets me about the necessary flow rates is that if they were true, triton would make way more supplying miniaturized water jet propulsion to the military and ROV manufacturers than going on indigogo with a scuba mask.
Actually, it is 1Å = 0.1nm smaller.If it can align O₂ molecules to pass through holes just 1nm smaller in one direction than H₂O molecules, by making the holes 1nm larger, it would become a desalination filter.
If the filter really passed only O₂ molecules as they claim, it could only happen if there was a PPO₂ gradient across the filter. On surface, we have 1 bar of O₂ on the recipient size (pure O₂ hence 1000 ml/L), on the wet size we have in the very best case of maximally oxygenated water only 10 ml/L (14 mg/L). It means that for passing the molecules through the filter (ignoring the energetic costs of it, and ignoring the energy cost of aligning the O₂ molecules), we would need to apply the pressure of 100 bar on the wet size. 100 bar is 10 MPa. At the depth of 5m you would need 15 MPa of pressure for the filtering.We should be careful on the numbers we quote, we can’t take the energy requirement to filter SALT out of water and assume their device will need the same power, since this gives them a line of defence by saying that filtering oxygen is much less energy demanding
I did not refer to any reverse osmosis in my calculation. You need a partial pressure gradient in every case, at any filter (EDIT: otherwise the gas would flow in the opposite sense). The reverse osmosis used in desalination alone is irrelevant. I used it only as a reference for comparing the energetic cost to supply the necessary pressure, but you can as well search the power of a corresponding pump instead.Although I agree with your estimate, and it does sound convincing to me, we cannot even assume that the magic filter works thought reverse osmosis
That's exactly why I wrote "risk of mixing comparable volumes of oxygen and hydrogen". Hydrogen becomes highly explosive at the concentration of 4% in air (source Wiki), which corresponds to the ratio of H₂:O₂ of 1:5.25, so due to the size of the nano-holes, and because of minimally 50% of O₂ molecules not aligned to pass through the filter, the ratio would be minimally 1:4 or even higher.A mix of hydrogen and oxygen, in a proportion of 97% hydrogen and 3% oxygen is actually used by scuba diver
Indeed they have done so. I have my original complaint to Indiegogo in which I quoted the campaign: ‘Triton, World's First Artificial Gills Re-breather’ ... This change is quite recent and does not pertain to the re-booting.Is my memory playing tricks on me, or did they just change the title of the campaign?! It reads "World's First Artificial Gills Oxygen Respirator" but I specifically remember it being called a "re-breather" in the very title . Can indiegogo campaigns change their damn TITLE during funding, or was this changed when they refunded everybody and re did the campaign on April 1st?
This was already discussed several times here. The volume and the weight of O₂ are bigger than at H₂O, but the molecules differ in shape. The O₂ molecule is 0.1 nm slimmer in the cross-cut direction:And btw: Isn't a water molecule actually smaller than an O2 molecule?
Nice find! Yes, it is the same bunk, not taking in account the actual amount of oxygen dissolved in water, and the partial pressures needed for the gas exchange through the membrane. Still, the diagrams show a device much bigger than Triton. At quick reading I did not see the CO₂ scrubber here either, but at least it seems to have some internal volume to actually keep some gas.Somewhere I ran across this reference to a Korean patent ...
Somewhere I ran across this reference to a Korean patent
REBREATHER USING HOLLOW FIBER MEMBRANE WITH BUFFER
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publ...locale=en_EP&CC=KR&NR=101078280B1&KC=B1&ND=5W
I copied the link and I recall that whomever was talking about this had speculated that young Mr. Yeon may have seen this and used it as inspiration for his SADI design project. Does anybody know more about this? I can't find any substantive information regarding what the patent is all about.
Yes, that change happened today. I've got a screenshot of the comments page from this morning (2016-04-18) with the old "Triton, World's First Artificial Gills Re-breather" Title:Indeed they have done so. I have my original complaint to Indiegogo in which I quoted the campaign: ‘Triton, World's First Artificial Gills Re-breather’ ... This change is quite recent and does not pertain to the re-booting.
Is my memory playing tricks on me, or did they just change the title of the campaign?! It reads "World's First Artificial Gills Oxygen Respirator" but I specifically remember it being called a "re-breather" in the very title . Can indiegogo campaigns change their damn TITLE during funding, or was this changed when they refunded everybody and re did the campaign on April 1st?
They haven't shown any response to critics except when Indiegogo got involved. Based on the subtle removal of "rebreather" and the uncharacteristic lack of responses on the comments page I think its a fair assumption that we are seeing reactions to communications being received by TRITON from Indiegogo.Another demonstration that they are following their critics and quietly fixing basic errors that they have made where they think their backers won't notice.
Maybe...I'm not as close to this as some...but my impression is that Indiegogo doesn't seemThey haven't shown any response to critics except when Indiegogo got involved. Based on the subtle removal of "rebreather" and the uncharacteristic lack of responses on the comments page I think its a fair assumption that we are seeing reactions to communications being received by TRITON from Indiegogo.
If you use the term 'air' it will be immediately contestable. You have to use the maximum solubility of oxygen, not of air. Your 29 ml air contain only 6 ml of oxygen, which is in fact less than what I calculate with in my examples.Let me repeat my approach to this matter. I want to prove beyond any doubt that their prototype is faked. That is why I do not take the "typical concentration of oxygen in water", measured in a specific river, as you source.
Not really. I think we should contest the claims in their campaign, and not inventing our own ideas how it works. You could also invent that the device generates O₂ by electrolysis, or by cold fusion, or teleportates it from remote tanks.Following your advice will prove that triton is "even more impossible in some situations", while I believe we should concentrate on "impossible in any situation". Do you agree?
I think the best way to prove them wrong is debunking precisely their claims. When they change them, we'll prove wrong the new version. If you start debunking something else than they claim, especially when speaking to a lawyer, he'll stop listening immediately, regardless if your result is even more optimistic than the reality.
No, it is not. The values I used in my examples are based on the global real-world oxygen concentrations of seawater and freshwater. Not on any pure-oxygen saturated water, or on some data from one random river or lake as you suggested earlier. Those are statistical data based on thousands of measurements. Make sure to have a look at the document I linked earlier: Dissolved Oxygen. It also explains why water can be supersaturated in nature: the main factors are the photosynthesis and rapid aeration. I think the best would be using the nominal 100% saturation (at 1 bar of air and 20°C it is 9.03 mg/L corresponding to 6.32 ml of O₂ at atmospheric pressure), while showing also a sample for the maximum average O₂ concetration of 14 mg/L (~10 ml).This is a good point, I'll rewrite that section to meet their exact claims at first, so oxygen only. But I would still stick to the solubility number for Air and take the oxygen portion from that (35% i think, it is described in detail that source). The higher quote for oxygen is only valid if you only dissolve oxygen in air (no nitrogen present in the water).
Goretex is something totally different. It repulses liquid water or water drops due to the surface tension of the droplets. Due to the hydrophobic properties of the texture, it will not disturb the surface tension of the droplets, hence they will not soak through the texture. Goretex has no chance to filter dissolved gases from water, or anything else that is enclosed in the droplets, just because they stay intact.Random side note though: not all filters are working on the principal of molecular size. For example goretex allows all air through, including nitrogen and carbon dioxide - quite large particles, but stops liquid water. It even allows water vapour through. Though it couldn’t be used in this case, since getting it wet clogs the airflow. And it is very sensitive to pressure, just the tiniest bit will push water to the other side.
... I forgot to add that, of course, there are other ways to extract gases from liquids - finally the gills of fish are the best example. Although, even there you still need to assure sufficient partial pressure gradients of the gases through the wall, and the right chemical processes in the transfer medium (blood) to assure the gaseous exchange. Not speaking about the order of magnitude lower oxygen needs of fish metabolism vs mammalians.Random side note though: not all filters are working on the principal of molecular size.
One thing that bothers me is that Triton used to word “oxygen tank” for a scuba tank. It is an annoying colloquialism to say “oxygen” when you really just mean “air for breathing”. They do that in the movies all the time. No self respecting scuba gear company would use this term in this way, but I guess we established Triton is far from that. This led me to do the math with air, especially since that would have been more feasible anyway, but I guess assuming “they actually meant air” might be taking it a step too far.
Also suddenly two supposedly real interested supports show up... gee how bad do people want to loose there money?Hello, I can see that you have a lot of free time so you have been using google to determinate on how Triton works and you already know all of our secrets, GREAT JOB, we will make you disappointment dough on December 2016 so don't keep your hops up to hate us, I can bet that you will be first in line to buy yourself a Triton when it's on the market, have a great day hating :)
This in fact makes it for the debunking even easier, because it puts some limits on either of their technologies, and we know that the the dimensional ratio between the two technologies is about 1:1. Still no chance to work, because each of the technologies can deliver only a tiny fraction of the needed oxygen.We did a change on Triton to make the functionality and handling of Triton much better, before we had both the artificial gills and the liquid oxygen on both side of Triton, so to make Triton easier to use we placed the artificial gills on the left side of Triton and the liquid oxygen on the right side.
This means that you only will connect one liquid oxygen canister to Triton.
The handling will be much better with this solution, we are always looking to improve Triton that is why we travel a lot and have little time to answer everyone, but please keep sending us your nice emails and comments on IGG and our Facebook page this means a lot to us :)